I hardly think that people who voted for a know-nothing, cruel, spiteful narcissist with the manners and tact of a moody teenager for Prez 3 years ago are in a position to tell anybody else in this country how they should vote.
We did this not too long ago, but in IMHO: What was the worst thing you expected from a Hillary Presidency?
I also wanted to hear the worst things which would happen if we open the borders.
I will say that I found even the worst-case scenarios posted in the above to be far less than “destructive”, but perhaps this thread may enlighten me as well.
One thing that I have noticed is that once you start getting people making decisions that have never experienced how those decisions will affect those who have to carry them out, the company starts going downhill pretty fast.
Having those voices may just not hurt, they may in fact be what keeps the company viable and relevant.
Free everything. Wealth taxes. Ridiculous minimum wage. Increased union power. Open borders. Anti freedom of speech…
Might as well just wrap up the remaining factories and ship them to China and hope printed fiat money holds some value over the next few decades.
Are you referring to theDemocratic Party Platform? The one that is in the United States? I see a $15/hour minimum wage proposal. (which I don’t find “ridiculous” but you might) I didn’t see the rest of what you listed.
ETA: I’d be especially interested in “free everything.”
I don’t like the idea of open borders or immigration laws that aren’t enforced, I don’t feel like those people belong in this country.
However, do you realize how much it costs nowadays just to survive, minimum wage hasn’t gone up in at least 10 years, but even wages higher than that you can’t really make it in the United States nowadays even making say $20/hour, maybe if you have absolutely no debt and you live with no luxuries at all. The price on everything keeps going up but American wages buy less and less every year.
I don’t get what’s wrong with Unionization either, if Unions aren’t American I don’t know what is, corporations are about making money, more money, more profits, and that’s it, if they have all the power they will exploit it and cripple their employees from having any kind of quality of life, how many corporations really treat their employees like they are anything more than a disposable cog in the machine, not too many.
It amounts to a destruction of property rights on an enormous scale. 3500 of the biggest American corporations are going to be severely crippled by a syndicalist takeover. This is the kind of thing that hasn’t happened in industrialized nations for over 50 years.
In the United States, the political party platforms are written by the activists who are sent over to a corner while the party players plan the convention. At best, the platform reads like a decent essay from a political science student at a good university.
They’re completely irrelevant. Does anyone think Trump even knows that there was a Republican Party platform?
In recent US history, it was only the Contract for America that a political party actually tried to get passed once the Republicans took control of Congress in 1995.
How, exactly, are the corporations going to be “severely crippled” by having to listen to (not necessarily implement, or even give lip service to, but merely listen to) opinions voiced by representatives of their employees? (I’m not sure what definition of syndicalism this meets, either.)
Why aren’t you directing your ire towards Hurricane Ditka?
Ok, here’s the quote I referenced earlier:
We have a corrupt administration that has been bought and paid for to represent the interests of big corporations over the public’s interests. I am not so naive as to think those interests are not intertwined, but when we’re running trillion dollar deficits and sacrificing the future for the short term profits of fossil fuel interests, we have to acknowledge that the “destruction” they want you to fear in Democratic policies is that billionaires will have to cut back to being jerked off by teenage prostitutes three times a day instead of four while the public lives in poverty and dies of treatable diseases.
They “don’t want the public thinking about that,” and they have their ways of making that happen. Stoking fear of a socialist nightmare that is found nowhere in any actual proposal. Fear of an economic collapse if inequality is mediated when greater wealth for the masses can only goose a consumer economy like ours. They’re going to eliminate Jeusus and, more importantly, take your guns!!! :eek:
It is all bullshit. The GOP does not represent the public, but only their wealthy donors. The Dems are not perfect by a long shot, but what the public “needs to be thinking about” is that the GOP wants to fuck the public right in the ass (literally if you are a teen prostitute).
It is a binary choice and we can’t talk about the Dems in a vacuum. Prove me wrong.
I don’t think the Dems platform is destructive, but I do question whether or not the country is ready to embrace some of their ideas.
It’s difficult to critique a party ‘agenda’ or platform that doesn’t yet exist. :smack: But we can expect certain corporate players to benefit, and others not so much, from whatever Dems put together.
Consider: EVERY politician works to advance their own interests, which MIGHT coincide with some public interests, but CERTAINLY benefits their contributors. A pol who doesn’t deliver for their constituents, whether voters or donors, soon must find an honest job.
Presidential candidates may proclaim whatever programs they think will grab votes. But a party will likely continue its habits for its old supporters unless/until reformed. I hold not my breath.
How will an upcoming Dem platform hurt America? By continuing its corporatism.
I wonder the same thing, but then I look at how enthusiastic people were in 2016 about Bernie’s somewhat radical ideas. Also, AOC is more on the radical left side of things (I think we should just call it “progressive,” which is what I identify as–a progressive independent) and she’s like Elvis-popular.
But there’s also the problem with actually passing or implementing such progressive ideas, so in practice some might have to be tempered with more moderate concessions. I find it at least interesting just how radical some of these proposals are–no holds barred–and how excited the base is about it all. I feel like Bernie proved we want major changes, and I think the reduction to the status quo that HRC represented really de-motivated and turned off practically everyone.
I think the trend of the nation is obviously Progressivism, regardless of how Trump and the current political climate makes it seem. In fact, I see the GOP in the desperate throes of a dying ideology (actually I don’t think they even have a unified ideology anymore, other than keeping the fat cats fat and general control over the poor, minorities and women, Hell, they accepted Trump as the GOP Messiah and he’s not even an actual republican). I see each generation growing up more thoughtful and concerned for one another (i.e. “too politically correct” which is just complaining we can’t openly call those different from us racial or sexual epithets anymore).
I don’t know how the GOP can continue, or gain more young people. It seems to be dying off at the same velocity as baby boomers are dying off, without much of a younger generation buying-in.
Something that gives me hope, as an example, is marijuana legislation. I live in a very red state where even the backwards folk from my small hometown leapt at the chance to pass very progressive MM laws.
All that said, I’m politically aghast and somewhat pessimistic that we were able to get to where we are now, so my optimism is mitigated by, you know, current reality.
In terms of donations, the difference this time is several candidates are refusing large donations from corporations, and pushing for reform to the system such that big donations from lobbying groups become illegal.
So if you’re saying politicians serve their donors, then that’s a reason to think there will be change this time around, not the opposite.
And it’s also why serving their voters is not business as usual.
Democrats in the past threw a few table scraps to their base but largely served corporate interests.
Republicans don’t even bother with the scraps; they just tell their voters what they want them to believe.
Trying to do what is in the interest of your voters would be a radical shift.
As I recall, [del] giving [/del] including a place at the corporate meeting table for a representative of the “shop” was a cornerstone of a successful corporation in all the management bestsellers during the Clinton years, when corporations made oodles of money. Have conservatives forgotten when and how they got rich in the first place?
AIUI, the alleged problem with Obama/AOC/Tlaib/Omar etc. is that they will remove the White People of Jesus from America and replace God’s Own People with brown aliens like Middle Eastern People & American Indians. Or something.
At least, if you ask my more racist relatives.
Assuming, of course, that those who have refused those donations get elected.
If they lose, not only does the candidate that is beholden to large donors win, but also that just reinforces that accepting those donations is necessary to win.
Yeah, but right now the momentum is with progressives. Biden is still in the mix, but has been in a shallow decline from the start. Other corporate democrats are in the last chance saloon (or whatever the idiom is).
Warren, Sanders and yes, Yang, seem to have the wind behind them.
But, I’m basically just arguing against the cynical line rather than making any concrete predictions. I’ve run into a few people recently who have said words to the effect of “It’s all business as usual whoever gets elected” (and a particularly politically clueless friend described Warren as a watered-down Clinton :smack:)
This could not be a more inappropriate time for that cynicism. The republicans have basically thrown away the constitution, rule of law, and any attempt to respect the voters or the truth to rally around their man. Trump’s impetuous decisions have shown to have real, terrible consequences.
Meanwhile democrats are for the first time promising policies that are genuinely progressive; not progressive by american standards but progressive, period. And also, for the first time, pledging to really clean the swamp by taking the money out of politics.
Right now the country is on a knife edge. I’ll concede that one of the directions the country could land is the status quo.
But two other directions are 1: A lunatic authoritarian regime free of any checks on its power, and 2: A government that largely does what it was elected to do: serve the interests of its constituents instead of the highest bidder.
Ah, optimism. 
I agree, that if we all band together, and vote for the candidates who are not beholden to donors, then that destroys the donor’s power. I’m on board, I just am not sure that a large enough percentage of the population is.
Money buys ads, and ads influence less engaged voters. If only highly engaged voters voted, then ads would have very little influence.
I do what I can to push us onto option 2, but I fear that it may not be enough.